Iran Sanctions Are the Talk of the Day

If there were any doubts about what exactly U.S. President Barack Obama meant
when he warned Iran of "growing consequences" during his State of
the Union address last month, they seem to be dispelled by recent statements
from top administration officials, who are beating the sanctions drum loud
and clear.

When U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates spoke of sanctions Monday as the
sole remaining option in dealing with Iran’s nuclear ambitions, he was echoing
another more outspoken colleague  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

"The only path that is left to us at this point, it seems to me, is that
pressure track but it will require all of the international community to work
together," Gates said during a news conference Monday in Paris with French
Defense Minister Hervé Morin, regarding the need for tougher sanctions.

Morin was in "complete agreement" with his U.S. counterpart. But
should Iran have a last-minute change of heart and concede to Western demands,
the U.S. and its allies would be open to "a peaceful way to resolve this
issue," the Pentagon chief said.

Clinton had told reporters last Friday, "We think it is important that
we move now toward looking at what pressure, what sanctions can be brought
to bear on the Iranians."

Talk of sanctions does not hurt in Washington and to a lesser degree in Western
European capitals, where many are weary of what they see as Iran’s mind games
and perceived intransigence. In fact, as Mehrzad Boroujerdi, an Iran expert
at New York’s Syracuse University, says, it has become "a popular sport
in Washington" to bash Iran.

The remarks by two senior officials of the Obama administration came after
recent contradictory messages coming out of Iran with regard to its nuclear
program. On Feb. 2, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told Iranian state television
that he had "no problems" with a deal with the West to swap Iran’s
low enriched uranium for nuclear fuel rods.

Although Ahmadinejad’s remarks were largely met with skepticism, they sparked
some hope that Iran might be pursuing a different course of action. However,
ending any enthusiasm that he might have generated in the outside world, in
a 180-degree change, Ahmadinejad ordered the country’s nuclear energy organization
last Sunday to start enriching uranium to 20 percent.

Iran needs 20-percent enriched uranium to operate a medical research reactor
in the capital, Tehran.

Obama made unprecedented overtures to Iran when he took office last year,
to encourage Iran to come to the negotiating table over its nuclear program.
The U.S. and its allies set a deadline for last December for Iran to respond
to a proposal for a nuclear fuel exchange deal, but Iran did not accede to
Western demands.

"The window for diplomacy is quickly closing. The language of the Obama
administration has changed dramatically, and the actions of the Ahmadinejad
government has hardly help build confidence," said Trita Parsi, president
of the National Iranian American Council. "At this stage, a period of
punitive and confrontational measures may be politically unavoidable."

Now, with additional sanctions promoted as the new tool for confronting Iran,
the key question is how and when the U.S. can get the other two members of
the P5+1 club, China and Russia, onboard with other Western powers. The P5+1
group is made up of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security
Council plus Germany, a leading trading partner of Iran.

Although Russia has been recently more in line with Western powers over imposing
more sanctions on Iran, China has remained a serious opponent of further punitive
measures.

Many analysts attribute Beijing’s position to the growing commerce between
the two countries. A recent Financial Times report says China is now
Iran’s number one trading partner, overtaking the European Union (EU).

The volume of Iran’s commerce with China stood at $36.5 billion in 2008, according
to the FT, while the EU’s trade with Iran totaled $35 billion for the
same year. In return, Iran supplies 11 percent of China’s energy needs, according
to the Iran-China Chamber of Commerce.

"I am not holding my breath that these sanctions will work," Boroujerdi
told IPS. "It’s really hard to sanction an oil-rich state that has something
that the rest of the world needs."

Boroujerdi sees the ongoing smuggling activity conducted through the country’s
borders as another factor that can challenge sanctions’ success.

In fact, many experts are deeply skeptical about the effectiveness of sanctions
and consider them a failure in general. Although the U.S. and its allies have
spoken of "smart sanctions" mostly aimed at Iran’s military institutions,
such as the Revolutionary Guards and its affiliate businesses, there is a lot
of doubt as to whether a sanctions policy can bring an end to Iran’s nuclear
program.

The U.S. has imposed a ban on U.S. companies dealing with Iran for the past
three decades but, in effect, the sanctions are considered largely ineffective
as the Islamic Republic has looked elsewhere for business.

Iran’s nuclear program has not been only a source of controversy in the Western
world but also among Middle Eastern countries, particularly Israel. They doubt
Iran’s nuclear activities are for peaceful energy purposes and charge that
Iran is seeking a nuclear bomb.

Iranian officials have repeatedly rejected this claim and say the program
is solely geared toward peaceful purposes, such as producing electricity.

As a deal between Iran and the West appears far-fetched at this point, calls
for regime change and use of force against Iran are on the rise. Richard Haass,
head of the Council on Foreign Relations, in an article entitled "Enough
Is Enough," called on Obama administration to work for regime change
in Iran, a policy former President George W. Bush unsuccessfully pursued for
years.

Daniel Pipes, a neoconservative, has called for bombing Iran, saying it was
a way for Obama to "salvage his tottering administration" and protect
the U.S. and its allies.